HRM charter changes proposed to speed up housing builds

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by OliverD

Unless we can invent teleportation, I don't think we're getting rid of cars in any sort of foreseeable future.

As with almost every debate, the extremes can mostly be ignored. Anyone who is slightly pragmatic realizes that we can't just get rid of cars in our cities en masse – certainly not the way they are built in their current form.

Since WWII, we have prioritized car travel over every other mode of transportation and that has had massive consequences. Now the pendulum is swinging slightly the other way and a lot of people are taking that as a "war on cars" - never mind that on the whole, cars are still given the most space, the most funding for their infrastructure, etc. by several orders of magnitude.

The war is not on cars, but rather on car dependence. Cars can still exist but our transportation framework needs to acknowledge that they are not the only option, nor should they be. And if that means slight inconvenience for drivers, so be it. Transit users, pedestrians, and cyclists have put up with massive inconveniences for decades and I really don't see how anyone can argue that levelling the playing field a bit is a bad thing.

To my way of thinking, this is a well-rounded response and I can't disagree with it.

I think my comments in the post above also apply here, for the most part.

[ILoveHalifax]

People did not just walk before there were cars - they rode in horse and buggy and before there were motorcycles people rode horses.

Imagine any city with no cars and knee deep in HORSE SHIT

[Keith P.]

Back to the original discussion, the Province has not only launched shots across HRM's bow, but landed one squarely amidships:

https://www.saltwire.com/halifax/new...ays-100786222/

The screams from the Mayor and certain Council members ring quite hollow given HRM's many tools that are seemingly designed to slow development at every turn. One hopes the next charter change relates directly to limiting the powers of mayor and council in a number of other areas. They have consistently proven themselves unfit to govern a billion-dollar enterprise.

[Arrdeeharharharbour]

I'm looking forward to the day that I hear that the province has shut down (shut up!) one of those NIMBY meetings called the public consultation phase which are essentially a built-in campaign opportunity for councllors. It would be interesting to know how many homes have been lost due to this forced/mandatory campaign phase over the years. Maybe the province will step-in and allow builders to add floors back onto developments such as the Victoria Hall re-development.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Arrdeeharharharbour

I'm looking forward to the day that I hear that the province has shut down (shut up!) one of those NIMBY meetings called the public consultation phase which are essentially a built-in campaign opportunity for councllors. It would be interesting to know how many homes have been lost due to this forced/mandatory campaign phase over the years. Maybe the province will step-in and allow builders to add floors back onto developments such as the Victoria Hall re-development.

The province should step in and blow up the height requirements in the centre plan... imagine the ensuing whining from the city that would result from that!

[Keith P.]

Meanwhile, a poorly-disguised lobbyist for the hotel industry weighs in on the proposed changes. Apparently all the new units that will be constructed will become AirBNBs and Vrbo units, who knew?

https://www.saltwire.com/halifax/bus...ost-100786159/

If you want a few laughs, go to the hotel review sites like Tripadvisor and others that have reviews of the Hampton Inn and the Hilton in the relatively new Brunswick St redevelopment, both of which were used by HRM as homeless shelters recently. I feel sorry for the tourists that were booked there and put up with what they describe, with nightmarish conditions for paying guests thanks to zero attention by hotel management and staff to the black eye it gave both their facility and the city overall as a tourist destination. Apparently once the homeless moved in, housekeeping and janitorial personnel were either overwhelmed or simply moved out. I cannot imagine any of those visitors saying nice things to their friends about HRM once returning home. Perhaps Ms Grant-Fiander should worry about that instead.

[Hali87]

I'm not sure that the situation had been better if instead of housing those homeless people in the hotel they had just been left on the street. I'm reminded of a (relatively nice) hotel I stayed at in Downtown Edmonton a couple months ago where ~100% of the ground-floor windows were shattered, apparently by the bored/angry homeless crowd who were congregated outside of it (in the very intense summer heat) the entire time I was there. I honestly think they would have been less conspicuous/disruptive inside than out. Ultimately it's just not a very good situation and any mitigation or lack thereof will be problematic in some ways at this point.